Arsenal legend Alan ‘Smudger' Smith will be joining authors Alex Fynn and Kevin Whitcher to sign copies of their updated paperback of ‘The Glorious Game: Arsène Wenger, Arsenal and the quest for success' at Waterstones in North Finchley next Thursday (9th December) from 4.30pm. In return for a plug(!), football business guru Alex Fynn answered some questions for Arsenal World about the future of Arsenal in the light of the pricing policy at new stadium and the rise of Chelsea…
The new chapters in the book emphasise the importance of getting younger fans into the new stadium for the long-term future. Yet by asking new season ticket holders to pay for their season tickets at Ashburton Grove a whole year in advance of the first match, are the club handicapping their future prospects of healthy attendances in the future?
In a word 'probably'. As long as Arsenal keep doing the business then the club can afford to treat fans differently to the way retail outlets treat their customers. A customer can take his business elsewhere; a fan can't. And with demand currently far exceeding supply, the club feels confident that they will be able to continuously raise prices. However even with a popular team this is a high risk strategy as there is a limit to how much people can pay and Arsenal are seemingly approaching that level whereby value for money is diminished and asking season ticket holders to pay hundreds and even thousands of pounds in advance may be one step too far.
The club level is obviously aimed at those with a corporate hospitality budget to spend. On top of the season ticket costs of around £2,500 for the cheapest seat there, use of the restaurant will not come cheap. Shouldn't this sector actually be subsidising the rest of the stadium's admission cost? With current pricing levels at Highbury unlikely to be reduced, it sure doesn't feel like it.
Match day income - through the gate, season tickets, corporate hospitality, catering and programmes - will obviously be enhanced as a result of both the quality and quantity of available accommodation in the new stadium. The objective of corporate development was that it should subsidise cheaper areas of the ground. In theory this will still pertain to Ashburton Grove but in practice, the differential will not be as great as it could or should be. Originally Arsenal talked about 20,000 seats at £20, then £30 and above. Now paraphrasing Mr Edelman at the AGM, he has said seats will be no more expensive than the last year at Highbury. Well, they are already prohibitively expensive to many and yet may continue to rise. Under these circumstances with all types of fans being asked to pay money up front and in effect subsidise the club, it is only the corporate element - because of the scarcity value of the costliest places - who can afford to do this with impunity.
It's been mooted that Arsenal's cashflow problems have hampered Arsene Wenger's ability to strengthen the squad. Do you think this is true or do you believe Wenger's just being extremely prudent?
I think Arsenal were surprised at how successful their venture into property has become, realising a turnover of £42 million last year. So, on the one hand despite the enormous debt as a result of the stadium loans, and the increased wages for the players, the wages:turnover ratio is at a sustainable level. This means that cashflow has not been the problem that many, including myself, feared. The only reason that Arsenal don't spend exorbitant sums on players is because in the view of the manager, they aren't essential to the well being of the club. Quite simply he can get who he wants at a value for money price. Further he is conscious that his legacy will not just be today's team but the infrastructure both in terms of facilities and the youth system that can only be sustained if there is a long-term strategy to go alongside the need for short-term success.
As a man with an in-depth knowledge of football finance, do you believe the vast financial advantage Chelsea hold over other English clubs means that a period of domination in inevitable for them?
The advent of Roman Abromavich is along with the creation of the Premier League the most significant watershed in English club football. Unfortunately unlike the Premiership - whose coming has at least benefited the 20 member clubs - Chelsea's windfall is benefiting them alone. Unfortunately in so doing it has destabilised the football business, especially the transfer market. The best client was always one who gave you a blank cheque and then disappeared on holiday. This is comparable to the situation at Chelsea with the added disadvantage to their competitors that the man in charge of spending is a most capable manager. The combination of Abromavich's wealth and Mourinho's expertise will deliver a number of trophies, probably starting this season and as long as the two key men remain, there will be a Chelsea dynasty which will rival anything that the game has yet seen.
Would such a dynasty have a long-term effect on Arsenal's attendances at the new stadium?
Because of the success and pleasure Arsène Wenger's teams have brought the fans since he first arrived at Highbury, Arsenal could afford a fallow year. By their standards this means no trophies but at least a Champions League qualification. Anything less than this will appear poor value for money particularly if a number of stars decide to go elsewhere and the fans may vote with their feet; and who can blame them? Anything more than this and perhaps the Arsenal board can get away with their high pricing policy, which is merely an extension of what is on offer at Highbury today. It's a pity that the issue is even discussed as a stadium of 60,000 capacity should be able to accommodate rich and poor alike. Someone somewhere has got their sums wrong.
(You can read our review of the new book here)